The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1887-05-04
PUBLISHED BY THe LONDON
"TIMEs" BROUGHT UP
In the House Of Commons by Charles
Edward Lewis, Saying These
Charges Against Him
CONSTITUTE ADISTiNCTBREACH
OF PRIVILEGE.
"Let the 'Times' Forward It's Bat
taliOns OF FOrgers and LIARS"
Said Mr.. Sexton.

privilege committed by the London
Times in an article charging John
Dillon with having told q falsehood
when he denied the papers allega-
tons that he was an acco mplice OF
Sheridan, the Iavincible. 1t this srti-
Gle the Times declares that Mr.. Dillon
in his denial had either presented 10
Parliament q tissue OF fctions he had
never taken the trouble to examine or
had reached q yet lower depth Of dis
honesty. Sheridan was simultaneously
the organizer OF murdsrous associs-
tons, and the close companion OF the
leaders OF the constitutional agitation.
"Mr. Dillon" the Times article con-
tinuss, "however convenient his
memory, can hardly have succeeded
in entirely forgetting their personal
relations. Mr.. Dillon has been called
the Cnevalier Bsyard Of the Irish
National League. He has been sup.
posed to stand apart in public esteem
from the rank and file OF his party.
What confidence can now De reposed
in his disclaimers, which show the best
OF the Parnellite party 10 be destitute
Of that quality which Englishmen
rightly prlzs above all Others as an in
dispeDssble foundation ofscharacter."
Mr.. Lewis concludes as follows:
"These Wholesale charges OF lying
a ainst Mr.. Dillon constitute distinct
breach OF privilege. l move the House
take notice oil them"
Phillip Albert Muntz, another Con-
sentative, and member for the north
division Of rwickshire, seconded
Mr.. Lewis's motion, Speaker Bell, an-
swering Mr.. Dillon, said II the House
decided that the article quoted by Mr..
Lewis was breach Of privilege, a mo-
ton could be made calling the offend
ers to the bar OF the House to answer
for their conduct in committing the
breach. The Right Hon. w. H.
Smith, First Lord Of the Treasury ON be-
half Of the government, moved that
the House adjourn in order that ques-
tions OF fact might be argued. Mr..
Dillon Eaid he desired to have the
question brought TO an issue right of.
He denied the right OF Mr.. Lewis to
take course, putting him on the de-
| fensive until his accuser was brought
to the bar Of the House. When the
publisher of the Times, Mr.. Dillon de-
Glazed, stood at the bar, he Mr.. Dill
lon) would prove him as bad d COW.
ardly liar as ever existed. Parnell-
| lie cheers.1 Mr.. Sexton eaid the Irish
party had been challenged much late
ly, and been TAINTED with not taking
up the challenge. Now they took 1t
up aud insisted upon an inquiry by
the House. Oheersl 1t was for an
assembly Of Euglish gentlemen to say
whether for the future It's Irish mem
bers should be exposed to the attack
| OF every ruffisn calling himself the
editor OF a newspaper. The House
should let the a:sailed members have
an inquiry by committee. "Then,"
said Mr.. Sex on, "let the Times bring
forward Its battalions OF forgers and
liars. The Irish members will prove
that they have been subjected to a
system of moral assassination. They
will be able fully to justify them.
selves" Cheers
Mr.. BTadlaugh opposed Mr.. Smiths
motion to adjourn, and charged the
government with connivauce at the
offerings OF Mr.. Lewis's motion, and
that the debate was concerted pan
to place in the hands OF the Conserva
tives weapons to assist them in the
passage OF the coercion bill.
Sir VIM. Vernon Harcourt said tina
though essentially Mr.. Lswib's motion
was against the Tunes, it was
in reality raised for the purpose of at
lacking Mr.. Dillon, and was q covert
method OF accusation by one section
Of the members Of the House agaips.
another. Yet, when the Irish men,
bers asked for an instant opportunity
OF meeting the charges, it was sought
by the government to adjourn the
House.
Mr.. Holmes, Attorney General for
Ireland, denied that the motion was
made with the connivance Of the gov
eminent. He had never heard OF the
motion until it was made. On behalf
OF the government, he disclaimed aly
intention OF po.tponing the debate
for party purposes. II the publisher
OF the Times was a. once called before
the bar OF the House, the House would
be unable TO hear evidence In support
Of the charges and would be required
to decide the question of hand. At
the absence Of the publisher or other
responsible person motion to adjourn
for inquiry was the best way to arrive
at the truth.
Mr.. ladetone opposed the motion 10
adjourn. He said Mr.. Dillon had been
charged with having stated a deliber-
ate falsehood while addressing the
House If anything constituted a
breach of privilege, this was breach.
The parties accused demanded immed-
late trial. 1t was impossible that the
House couli resist. 1t has always
been the custom for the House itself
to proceed to deal without delay with
a motion relating to breach OF priv.
ilege, afterwards, In special cases, ap.
pointing q select committee OF inquiry.
A division was then .aken on the
motion to adjourn, resulting in vote
OF 213 In favor OF tho motion and ia
against 1t. Mr.. Smith moved that on
Thursday the House resume consider.
alton OF the question. Mr.. Sexton
moved that 1t be taken up to.
Il AuViEONs MI OlllOu u6mhuu6u 10
know whether the editor OF the Times
would be brought TO the bar OF the
House.
Mr.. Smith could only say that the
usual course would be followed. It
was then agreed to take the question
up again tomorrow.
HOME RULH AGITATION TO BEGIN SOON.
LONDON, May 5 A home rule agi.
tation has been organized throughout
the west Of England. The Earl Of
Rosebery is announced to speak at
Plymouth on the Goth instant in favor
OF the movement.
The Right Hon. James Stahsfeld,
ex-president Of the Local Government
Board, will make home rule speech
at Newton Abbott on June 4th, and
Baron Wolvsrton and Mr.. Sexton will
Jointly address meeting in favor Of
Mr. GladstOne's policy at Exeter on
June 18th.
THE Sir JOHN BRANoN LIBEL CASE.